Pedestrian traffic deaths among residents, visitors, and homeless persons--Clark County, Nevada, 2008-2011.

Motor vehicle collisions and crashes are a leading cause of death among Nevada residents aged 5-34 years, representing 14% of all injury deaths in that age group in 2010. During 2008-2011, a total of 173 pedestrian deaths from motor vehicle collisions occurred in Nevada, accounting for 16% of motor vehicle deaths in the state. Approximately 75% (2 million persons) of Nevada residents live in Clark County, which includes the city of Las Vegas. To analyze pedestrian traffic deaths in Clark County among residents, visitors, and homeless persons, the Southern Nevada Health District used coroner's office data and death certificate data for the period 2008-2011. The results indicated that the average annual pedestrian traffic death rates from motor vehicle collisions during this period were 1.4 per 100,000 population for residents, 1.1 for visitors, and 30.7 for homeless persons. Among the three groups, time of day, location of motor vehicle collisions, and pedestrian blood alcohol concentration (BAC) differed. Effective interventions to increase roadway safety, such as lowering speed limits in areas with greater pedestrian traffic, targeting interventions during hours when alcohol-impaired walking is more likely, and modifying roadway designs to increase protection of pedestrians, might decrease pedestrian deaths among all three groups.

Special Report from the CDC: Evaluating the dissemination of CDC's MyMobility Plan: Findings and lessons learned.

INTRODUCTION: Age-related changes (e.g., cognitive, physiologic) can affect an individual's mobility and increase risks for falls and motor-vehicle crashes, which are leading causes of injuries and injury deaths among older Americans. To address this issue, CDC developed MyMobility Plan (MMP) products to help older adults make plans to reduce injury risks and promote safe mobility. In 2019, MMP products were disseminated to older adults and partner organizations. Dissemination strategies consisted of digital and print distribution and partner outreach. METHODS: To assess dissemination efforts, a process (or implementation) evaluation was conducted from January to June 2019. Data were collected for 17 indicators (e.g., counts of webpage visits, product downloads, social media posts). Key informant interviews were conducted with partners, and qualitative analyses of interview data were undertaken to identify key themes related to their dissemination experiences. RESULTS: Findings showed the dissemination resulted in 13,425 product downloads and print copy orders and reached almost 155,000 individuals through email subscriber lists, websites, webinars, and presentations. It is unknown what proportion of these individuals were older adults. Social media metrics were higher than expected, and 58 partners promoted products within their networks. Partner interviews emphasized the need for guidance on dissemination, collaboration with local partners, and integration of the products within a program model to ensure broader reach to and use by older adults. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of the dissemination campaign identified strategies that were successful in creating exposure to the MMP and others that could improve reach in the future. Those strategies include meaningful and early partner engagement for dissemination. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Building in evaluation from the start can facilitate development of appropriate data collection measures to assess project success. Engaging partners as active disseminators in the planning stages can help increase the reach of public health tools and resources.

Special Report from the CDC: Provider knowledge and practices around driving safety and fall prevention screening and recommendations for their older adult patients, DocStyles 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Falls and motor-vehicle crashes (MVCs) are leading causes of unintentional injury deaths among older adults (65+) in the United States. Injury prevention resources exist to help healthcare providers reduce fall and MVC risk among older adult patients. However, awareness of these resources among healthcare providers is unclear. METHODS: Questions were included in the 2019 DocStyles survey that assessed healthcare provider awareness of three injury prevention resources: (1) the American Geriatrics Society's (AGS's) Clinician's Guide to Assessing and Counseling Older Drivers, (2) the Clinical Assessment of Driving Related Skills (CADReS), and (3) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths, and Injuries (STEADI) initiative. We also explored the circumstances and current practices for counseling older adult patients on fall prevention and driving safety. RESULTS: Only 20% of providers reported awareness of any of the injury prevention resources. Providers were more likely to report either screening for fall risk or unsafe driving when an older adult presented with a fall concern (74.5%) or driving concern or recent crash (85.1%), compared to annual screening for fall risk (67.7%) or driving safety (47.7%). More providers reported discussing the increased fall or MVC risk associated with patient medications, referring patient for driving fitness evaluations, or discussing alternative transportation options with the patient after adverse events or patient-initiated concerns compared to routine annual discussions. CONCLUSION: Healthcare gaps persist in the screening and assessment of older adult risk factors for falls and unsafe driving. Limited provider awareness of clinical resources related to preventing older adult falls and unsafe driving may be contributing to these healthcare gaps. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Improving healthcare provider awareness of these resources could help them identify older adults at risk of a fall or MVC and promote injury prevention efforts in their clinical practices.

Examining Patterns of Driving Avoidance Behaviors Among Older People Using Latent Class Analysis.

Objectives: Some older drivers choose to avoid certain situations where they do not feel confident driving. Little is known about the process by which older drivers may use avoidance in transitioning to non-driving. Methods: We analyzed 2015 ConsumerStyles data for 1198 drivers aged 60+. Driving patterns were examined by sociodemographic and driving characteristics. Avoidance classes were characterized by latent class analysis. Results: Among drivers 60+, 79% reported driving 3+ days/week and 84% reported good to excellent health. We identified four driving avoidance classes (low, mild, moderate, and high). High- (versus low-) avoidance drivers were more likely female, 75+, not White/non-Hispanic, and to have income <$25,000/year. Discussion: Avoidance of selected driving behaviors may be one component of a multi-step process supporting the transition to non-driving. Drivers displaying avoidance behaviors may be receptive to resources to prepare for this transition and minimize negative health and quality of life outcomes that accompany driving cessation.

Comparison of 2008 national and state-level self-reported and observed seatbelt use estimates.

The objective of the study was to compare national and state-level estimates of self-reported and observed seatbelt use for 2008. Self-reported seatbelt use from the 2008 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System was compared with 2008 observed seatbelt use published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The ratio of self-reported belt use to observed use was calculated for each state, and the correlation between the two seatbelt measures was examined using the Pearson correlation coefficient. The median state ratio of self-reported to observed belt use was 0.97. Self-reported use was lower than observed use in 38 states. A moderate association was revealed between the self-reported and observed use (r=0.71, p<0.01). The findings suggest that, as seatbelt use has increased over time, measures of self-reported and observed use have converged, and any upward bias in self-reported use due to social desirability has substantially declined.

Barriers and facilitators of older adults' use of ride share services.

Introduction: Safe, affordable, and convenient transportation may help older adults (age 65 and older) stay independent, access healthcare services, and maintain their quality of life. While older adults in the United States primarily rely on private automobiles, those who reduce or cease driving may require alternative forms of transportation. Ride share services show promise as an alternative mode of transportation for older adults, particularly for those who no longer drive. Methods: We employed a qualitative research design to explore barriers and facilitators of older adults' use of ride share services and compare findings to younger adults (age 18 to 64). We conducted 96 telephone interviews (68 older adults and 28 younger adults), and 10 in-person focus groups (56 older adults and 17 younger adults), including individuals who used a ride share service and those who never used a ride share service. We conducted qualitative data analysis to identify key themes and developed a conceptual framework to organize and describe findings. Results: The qualitative analysis revealed the most important facilitator of older adults' use of ride share services was the desire to remain independent, particularly among those with health conditions and special needs that prevented them from using other transportation. Other facilitators included driver assistance (door-to-door service), a polite and courteous driver, a clean vehicle, and prompt and dependable service. Barriers among older adults included safety concerns, affordability, technology, and a lack of ride share services in the community. Among younger adults, technology was a facilitator of use. Conclusion: Ride share services are a promising transportation option. Findings highlight a need to tailor these services to older adults' needs. Ride share services that are safe, reliable, and offer driver assistance and telephone scheduling have the potential to support older adults' health, mobility, and independence.

Older Adult Willingness to Use Fully Autonomous Vehicle (FAV) Ride Sharing.

In the United States, older adults (age 65 and older) rely on private automobiles for transportation. For those who stop driving, access to alternative modes of transportation is important for health, wellbeing, mobility, and independence. This paper explores older adult willingness to use fully autonomous vehicle (FAV) ride sharing and the features or services of FAV ride sharing that would make them willing to take a ride. These data were gathered as part of a larger qualitative research study designed to explore the factors affecting older adult use of ride share services. For the larger study, we conducted 68 telephone interviews with older adults, and 10 in-person focus groups with 56 older adults, including individuals who both used and never used ride share services. We used a convenience sample recruited by study partners, including ride share and transportation services and a recruitment firm. The predominant thematic findings of the qualitative analysis included a desire for a proven safety record in terms of performance and technology, followed by dependability and accuracy of FAV ride sharing. Older adults' concerns about FAV ride sharing included safety concerns and preferences for social interaction with drivers. Ride share services that use FAVs in the future may need to tailor transportation offerings for older adults to increase their willingness to use FAVS to support their mobility and social needs.

Characteristics of ride share services for older adults in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Safe and accessible transportation options are important for older adults' health, safety, mobility, and independence. Ride share services may promote older adult health and well-being. This is the first study that describes ride share services available to older adults (65+ years) in the United States, including factors that may affect use of services. METHODS: We analyzed secondary data from two research and administrative databases provided by ITNAmerica, a national non-profit transportation service for older adults: ITNRides, which tracks information on older adults who used ITN in 29 locations across the United States from 1996 to 2019, and Rides in Sight, the largest national data source on ride share services for older adults. We conducted a literature review, and telephone interviews with nine key informants representing ride share services, referral services, and other organizations. We offer a conceptual framework describing factors that may affect older adults' use of ride share services. RESULTS: This study identified 917 non-profit ride share services and eleven for-profit ride share services available for older adults in the United States as of August 2018. Services varied by corporate structure, location, use of technology, and business model. The majority of non-profit services served primarily older adults, while the for-profit services served primarily younger adults. Riders from one multi-site non-profit service had a median age of 82. Use of ride share services is affected by individual needs and preferences; social conditions; and business and policy factors. CONCLUSION: Ride share services may offer a promising alternative to driving for older adults and may help to address negative health consequences associated with driving cessation. Practical applications: These findings may help policy makers, practitioners, and other stakeholders understand older adults' needs related to use of ride share services in order to offer solutions that prioritize public health and safety.

State-level seat belt use in the United States, 2011-2016: Comparison of self-reported with observed use and use by fatally injured occupants.

INTRODUCTION: Despite 49 states and the District of Columbia having seat belt laws that permit either primary or secondary enforcement, nearly half of persons who die in passenger vehicle crashes in the United States are unbelted. Monitoring seat belt use is important for measuring the effectiveness of strategies to increase belt use. OBJECTIVE: Document self-reported seat belt use by state seat belt enforcement type and compare 2016 self-reported belt use with observed use and use among passenger vehicle occupant (PVO) fatalities. METHODS: We analyzed the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) self-reported seat belt use data during 2011-2016. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was used to compare the 2016 BRFSS state estimates with observed seat belt use from state-based surveys and with unrestrained PVO fatalities from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System. RESULTS: During 2011-2016, national self-reported seat belt use ranged from 86-88%. In 2016, national self-reported use (87%) lagged observed use (90%) by 3 percentage points. By state, the 2016 self-reported use ranged from 64% in South Dakota to 93% in California, Hawaii, and Oregon. Seat belt use averaged 7 percentage points higher in primary enforcement states (89%) than in secondary states (82%). Self-reported state estimates were strongly positively correlated with state observational estimates (r = 0.80) and strongly negatively correlated with the proportion of unrestrained PVO fatalities (r = -0.77). CONCLUSION: National self-reported seat belt use remained essentially stable during 2011-2016 at around 87%, but large variations existed across states. Practical Applications: If seat belt use in secondary enforcement states matched use in primary enforcement states for 2016, an additional 3.98 million adults would have been belted. Renewed attention to increasing seat belt use will be needed to reduce motor-vehicle fatalities. Self-reported and observational seat belt data complement one another and can aid in designing targeted and multifaceted interventions.

Belief about seat belt use and seat belt wearing behavior among front and rear seat passengers in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Unrestrained drivers and passengers represent almost half of all passenger vehicle occupant deaths in the United States. The current study assessed the relationship between the belief about importance of seat belt use and the behavior of always wearing a seat belt. METHOD: Data from 2012 ConsumerStyles were analyzed separately for front and rear passenger seating positions. Multivariable regression models were constructed to identify the association between seat belt belief and behavior (i.e., always wears seat belt) among adults. Models controlled for type of state seat belt law (primary, secondary, or none). RESULTS: Seat belt use was higher in front passenger seats (86.1%) than in rear passenger seats (61.6%). Similarly, belief that seat belt use was very important was higher in reference to the front passenger seat (84.2%) versus the rear passenger seat (70.5%). For the front passenger seat, belief was significantly associated with seat belt use in states with both primary enforcement laws (adjPR 1.64) and secondary enforcement laws (adjPR 2.77). For the rear passenger seat, belief was also significantly associated with seat belt use, and two 2-way interactions were observed (belief by sex, belief by region). CONCLUSIONS: Despite overall high rates of seat belt use in the United States, certain groups are less likely to buckle up than others. The study findings suggest that efforts to increase seat belt use among high-risk populations, such as those who live in states with secondary or no seat belt laws and those who ride in rear seats (which include people who utilize taxis or ride-hailing vehicles) could benefit from interventions designed to strengthen beliefs related to the benefits of seat belt use. Practical applications: Future research that uses a theoretical framework to better understand the relationship between beliefs and behavior may inform interventions to improve seat belt use.

Associations between sociodemographics and safety belt use in states with and without primary enforcement laws.

OBJECTIVES: secondary enforcement laws (police may issue a safety belt citation only if the vehicle has been stopped for another reason). METHODS: We analyzed 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data from 50 states and the District of Columbia. We performed multivariable, log-linear regression analyses to assess the effect of sociodemographic characteristics and safety belt laws on safety belt use. Analyses were stratified by the type of enforcement permitted by state laws. RESULTS: Reported safety belt use was higher in states that had primary versus secondary enforcement laws, both overall and for each sociodemographic characteristic examined. Safety belt use was 85% in states that had primary enforcement laws and 74% in states that had secondary enforcement laws. Cross-sectional data suggested that primary enforcement laws may have the greatest effect on sociodemographic groups that reported lower levels of safety belt use. CONCLUSIONS: Primary enforcement laws are an effective population-based strategy for reducing disparities in safety belt use and may, therefore, reduce disparities in crash-related injuries and fatalities.

Pedestrian fatalities, Atlanta Metropolitan Statistical Area and United States, 2000-2004.

Motor vehicle crashes killed almost 5,000 pedestrians in 2005 in the United States. Pedestrian risk may be higher in areas characterized by urban sprawl. From 2000 to 2004, pedestrian fatality rates declined in the United States, but the Atlanta metropolitan statistical area did not experience the same decline. Pedestrian fatality rates for males, Hispanics, and the 15-34 and 35-54 year age groups were higher in Atlanta than in the United States overall. Pedestrian safety interventions should be targeted to high-risk populations and localized pedestrian settings.

School transportation mode, by distance between home and school, United States, ConsumerStyles 2012.

INTRODUCTION: Motor-vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death among children in the United States, and almost one-fourth of all trips by school-aged children are trips to and from school. This study sought to determine how children (5-18years) travel to and from school and, among those living ≤1mile of school, to explore the role of school bus service eligibility on school travel mode. METHODS: We used national 2012 survey data to determine prevalence of usual school travel mode, stratified by distance from school. For those living ≤1mile of school, multivariable regression was conducted to assess the association between bus service eligibility and walking or bicycling. RESULTS: Almost half (46.6%) of all children rode in passenger vehicles (PV) to school and 41.8% did so for the trip home. Results were similar among those living ≤1mile (48.1%, PV to school; 41.3%, PV to home). Among those living ≤1mile, 21.9% and 28.4% of children walked or bicycled to and from school, respectively. Ineligibility for school bus service was strongly associated with walking or bicycling to school [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR: 5.36; p<0.001)] and from school (aPR: 5.36; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of distance from school, passenger vehicles were a common mode of travel. For children who live close to school, the role that school bus service eligibility plays in walking or bicycling deserves further consideration. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Given the large proportion of children who use passenger vehicles for school travel, effective interventions can be adopted to increase proper child restraint and seat belt use and reduce crash risks among teen drivers. Better understanding of conditions under which bus service is offered to children who live close to school could inform efforts to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety for school travel.

Rural and Urban Differences in Passenger-Vehicle-Occupant Deaths and Seat Belt Use Among Adults - United States, 2014.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Motor-vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death in the United States. Compared with urban residents, rural residents are at an increased risk for death from crashes and are less likely to wear seat belts. These differences have not been well described by levels of rurality. REPORTING PERIOD: 2014. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEMS: Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) were used to identify passenger-vehicle-occupant deaths from motor-vehicle crashes and estimate the prevalence of seat belt use. FARS, a census of U.S. motor-vehicle crashes involving one or more deaths, was used to identify passenger-vehicle-occupant deaths among adults aged ≥18 years. Passenger-vehicle occupants were defined as persons driving or riding in passenger cars, light trucks, vans, or sport utility vehicles. Death rates per 100,000 population, age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population and the proportion of occupants who were unrestrained at the time of the fatal crash, were calculated. BRFSS, an annual, state-based, random-digit-dialed telephone survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population aged ≥18 years, was used to estimate prevalence of seat belt use. FARS and BRFSS data were analyzed by a six-level rural-urban designation, based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture 2013 rural-urban continuum codes, and stratified by census region and type of state seat belt enforcement law (primary or secondary). RESULTS: Within each census region, age-adjusted passenger-vehicle-occupant death rates per 100,000 population increased with increasing rurality, from the most urban to the most rural counties: South, 6.8 to 29.2; Midwest, 5.3 to 25.8; West, 3.9 to 40.0; and Northeast, 3.5 to 10.8. (For the Northeast, data for the most rural counties were not reported because of suppression criteria; comparison is for the most urban to the second-most rural counties.) Similarly, the proportion of occupants who were unrestrained at the time of the fatal crash increased as rurality increased. Self-reported seat belt use in the United States decreased with increasing rurality, ranging from 88.8% in the most urban counties to 74.7% in the most rural counties. Similar differences in age-adjusted death rates and seat belt use were observed in states with primary and secondary seat belt enforcement laws. INTERPRETATION: Rurality was associated with higher age-adjusted passenger-vehicle-occupant death rates, a higher proportion of unrestrained passenger-vehicle-occupant deaths, and lower seat belt use among adults in all census regions and regardless of state seat belt enforcement type. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Seat belt use decreases and age-adjusted passenger-vehicle-occupant death rates increase with increasing levels of rurality. Improving seat belt use remains a critical strategy to reduce crash-related deaths in the United States, especially in rural areas where seat belt use is lower and age-adjusted death rates are higher than in urban areas. States and communities can consider using evidence-based interventions to reduce rural-urban disparities in seat belt use and passenger-vehicle-occupant death rates.

Bicycle helmet use among persons 5years and older in the United States, 2012.

INTRODUCTION: In 2013, injuries to bicyclists accounted for 925 fatalities and 493,884 nonfatal, emergency department-treated injuries in the United States. Bicyclist deaths increased by 19% from 2010 to 2013. The greatest risk of death and disability to bicyclists is head injuries. The objective of this study was to provide estimates of prevalence and associated factors of bicycle riding and helmet use among children and adults in the United States. METHOD: CDC analyzed self-reported data from the 2012 Summer ConsumerStyles survey. Adult respondents (18+years) were asked about bicycle riding and helmet use in the last 30days for themselves and their children (5 to 17years). For bicycle riders, CDC estimated the prevalence of helmet use and conducted multivariable regression analyses to identify factors associated with helmet use. RESULTS: Among adults, 21% rode bicycles within the past 30days and 29% always wore helmets. Respondents reported that, of the 61% of children who rode bicycles within the past 30days, 42% always wore helmets. Children were more likely to always wear helmets (90%) when their adult respondents always wore helmets than when their adult respondents did not always wear helmets (38%). Children who lived in states with a child bicycle helmet law were more likely to always wear helmets (47%) than those in states without a law (39%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that bicycle helmets are highly effective at reducing the risk for head injuries, including severe brain injuries and death, less than half of children and adults always wore bicycle helmets while riding. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: States and communities should consider interventions that improve the safety of riding such as policies to promote helmet use, modeling of helmet wearing by adults, and focusing on high risk groups, including Hispanic cyclists, occasional riders, adults, and children ages 10 to 14.

Prevalence of selected maternal behaviors and experiences, Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), 1999.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Various maternal behaviors and experiences before, during, and after pregnancy (e.g., unintended pregnancy, late entry into prenatal care, cigarette smoking, not breast-feeding) are associated with adverse health outcomes for both the mother and the infant. Information regarding maternal behaviors and experiences is needed to monitor trends, to enhance the understanding of the relations between behaviors and health outcomes, to plan and evaluate programs, to direct policy decisions, and to monitor progress toward Healthy People 2000 and 2010 objectives. REPORTING PERIOD COVERED: This report covers data from 1993 through 1999. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) is an ongoing, state- and population-based surveillance system designed to monitor selected self-reported maternal behaviors and experiences that occur before, during, and after pregnancy among women who deliver a live-born infant. PRAMS employs a mixed-mode data collection methodology; up to three self-administered surveys are mailed to a sample of mothers, and nonresponders are followed up with a telephone interview. Self-reported survey data are linked to selected birth certificate data and weighted for sample design, nonresponse, and noncoverage to create annual PRAMS analysis data sets. PRAMS generates statewide estimates of various perinatal health topics among women delivering a live infant. Data for 1999 from 17 states are examined. In addition, trend data are examined for 12 states that had at least 3 years of data during 1993-1999. RESULTS: In 1999, the prevalence of unintended pregnancy resulting in a live birth ranged from 33.7% to 52% across the 17 states. During 1993-1999, only one state reported a decreasing trend in the prevalence of unintended pregnancy. Women aged <20 years, black women, women with less than or equal to a high school education, and women receiving Medicaid were more likely to report unintended pregnancy. The prevalence of late or no entry into prenatal care ranged from 16.1% to 29.9%. The prevalence of late or no entry into prenatal care significantly decreased over time in seven of the 12 states with trend data. In general, women aged <20 years, black women, women with less than a high school education, and women receiving Medicaid were more likely to report late or no entry into prenatal care. The prevalence of smoking during the last 3 months of pregnancy ranged from 6.2% to 27.2%, and the prevalence decreased in five states from 1993 to 1999. Overall, smoking during the last 3 months of pregnancy was associated with younger age (<25 years), non-Hispanic ethnicity, having less than or equal to a high school education, receiving Medicaid, and delivering a low birthweight infant. The prevalence of physical abuse by a husband or partner during pregnancy ranged from 2.1% to 6.3%. No trends were observed for physical abuse from 1996 to 1999, the only years for which these data were available. Across the 17 states, only Medicaid status was consistently associated with experiencing physical abuse during pregnancy. The prevalence of breast-feeding initiation ranged from 48% to 89%. Ten of 12 states with trend data reported increases in the prevalence of breast-feeding initiation. Overall, women aged <20 years, women with less than or equal to a high school education, and women receiving Medicaid were less likely to breast-feed. The prevalence of breast-feeding duration for at least 4 weeks ranged from 34.9% to 78.1%. From 1993 to 1999, increases in levels of breast-feeding for at least 4 weeks were observed in eight states. Women aged <25 years, black women, women with less than or equal to a high school education, and women receiving Medicaid were generally less likely to breast-feed for at least 4 weeks. The prevalence of back sleep position for infants ranged from 35.1% to 74.6%. Increases in the use of the back sleep position were observed in all 12 states with trend data from 1996 to 1999. Black race and having less than or equal to a high school education were consistently associated with not using the back sleep position. INTERPRETATION: For surveillance during 1993-1999, the majority or all states observed increases in breast-feeding initiation, breast-feeding for at least 4 weeks, and back sleep position. Approximately one half of the states observed decreases for late or no entry into prenatal care and smoking during the last 3 months of pregnancy. Little or no progress was observed in the prevalence of unintended pregnancy or physical abuse during pregnancy. With few exceptions, the 17 states failed to meet the Healthy People 2000 objectives for the seven reported behaviors in 1999. Certain de

Predictors of rear seat belt use among U.S. adults, 2012.

INTRODUCTION: Seat belt use reduces the risk of injuries and fatalities among motor vehicle occupants in a crash, but belt use in rear seating positions is consistently lower than front seating positions. Knowledge is limited concerning factors associated with seat belt use among adult rear seat passengers. METHODS: Data from the 2012 ConsumerStyles survey were used to calculate weighted percentages of self-reported rear seat belt use by demographic characteristics and type of rear seat belt use enforcement. Multivariable regression was used to calculate prevalence ratios for rear seat belt use, adjusting for person-, household- and geographic-level demographic variables as well as for type of seat belt law in place in the state. RESULTS: Rear seat belt use varied by age, race, geographic region, metropolitan status, and type of enforcement. Multivariable regression showed that respondents living in states with primary (Adjusted Prevalence Ratio (APR): 1.23) and secondary (APR: 1.11) rear seat belt use enforcement laws were significantly more likely to report always wearing a seat belt in the rear seat compared with those living in a state with no rear seat belt use enforcement law. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Several factors were associated with self-reported seat belt use in rear seating positions. Evidence suggests that primary enforcement covering all seating positions is an effective intervention that can be employed to increase seat belt use and in turn prevent motor vehicle injuries to rear-seated occupants.